Farm standards review – Beef & Lamb

We have published a series of independently reviewed reports to compare beef and lamb production standards in England – at both a regulatory and voluntary level – with those in four regions around the world. The reports will support wider industry assessments of the current farm assurance landscape.

We have compared standards in England with those in:

• Australia and New Zealand (April 2024)
• Key EU countries (July 2024)
• North America (October 2024)
• South America (November 2024)

Across all four comparative studies, Red Tractor is the most prescriptive and detailed scheme and achieved a higher overall score than all other schemes. However, there are areas of potential improvement for every scheme in each category.

All of the schemes provide some degree of customer reassurance, but this varies strongly according to the scheme and the specific category of study.

The standards in countries that do not have an established route to the UK consumer are less likely to reflect UK market needs in their core standards.

Australia and New Zealand

The dominant farm assurance scheme in each nation was chosen for this study:

• Red Tractor Beef and Lamb Standards (England)
• Livestock Production Assurance (Australia)
• New Zealand Farm Assurance Programme

The report also includes a high-level outline of the legislative framework in each country in which the assurance schemes operate.

Key findings

• Although Red Tractor Beef and Lamb Standards scored higher than both Livestock Production Assurance and New Zealand Farm Assurance Programme, there are areas of potential improvement for every scheme in each category
• Legislation was found that could be applied to almost all of the categories, providing a good legislative base for the standards

Key EU countries

Voluntary assurance schemes are available in all six of the countries selected for analysis. The dominant scheme in each nation was chosen for this study:

• Red Tractor Beef and Lamb Standards (England)
• Quality System (Germany)
• Quality Meat Poland
• Sustainable Beef and Lamb Assurance Scheme (Ireland)
• Label Rouge (France)
• Beter Leven (Netherlands)

Key findings

• Red Tractor Beef and Lamb Standards achieved a higher average score than the other schemes examined in this study, although other schemes scored higher than Red Tractor in five of the 14 categories in which assessments were carried out
• Beter Leven achieved a higher score in husbandry procedures and youngstock management, and matched Red Tractor’s score for animal health and welfare
• Quality System was the highest-scoring scheme in livestock transport, food safety and traceability

North America

The schemes chosen for this study were:

• Red Tractor Beef and Lamb Standards (England)
• Animal Welfare Approved
• Canada Verified Sheep
• Global Animal Partnership (GAP 5-Step )
• Verified Beef Production

Key findings

Other schemes displayed higher performance than Red Tractor in four of the 14 categories used for scheme comparison.

1. Feed and water: GAP 5-Step Lamb scored higher than Red Tractor in this category, with GAP 5-Step Beef equalling Red Tractor
2. Husbandry procedures: GAP 5-Step Lamb scored higher than Red Tractor in this category
3. Youngstock management: Animal Welfare Approved and Canada Verified Sheep scored higher than Red Tractor in this category
4. Animal health and welfare: Canada Verified Sheep scored higher than Red Tractor in this category

South America

Due to the scarcity of home-grown assurance systems in South America, some of the schemes considered for the fourth report originate from elsewhere but are used in the region.

Brazil, Uruguay and Argentina were chosen for this study as they regularly export more beef and lamb to the United Kingdom than other South American countries for which statistics are available.

The schemes chosen for analysis were:

• Red Tractor Beef and Lamb Standards (England)
• Certified Humane
• INAC Meat Cerification Programme 
• Global SLP

Key findings

Red Tractor achieved a higher average score than the other schemes across all categories used for analysis, except for Feed and Water and Animal Health and Welfare, where Certified Humane scored the highest.

How have these reports been delivered?  

These reports have been delivered by Birnie Consultancy*, comparing both the underpinning legislation and key voluntary assurance standards within each country of focus.

The reports were independently reviewed by four experts: 

• Jude Capper – Livestock Sustainability Consultant
• Nigel Scollan – Queens University, Institute of Global Food Security
• Mandy Lucas – Farm Animal Welfare Consultant
• Jonathan Statham – Veterinary Surgeon and Livestock Sustainability Consultant

The reports provide a robust and stringent independent summary of the current assurance landscape.

*Birnie Consultancy is a solutions-driven consultancy working with primary and secondary food processors, farmers, supermarkets, levy bodies, research institutions and governments across the UK and Europe.

If you have questions or wish to discuss this review of farm standards, get in touch with James Taylor, Head of Farm Assurance, via: james.taylor2@ahdb.org.uk